FORSETH: The comments of Attorney General David Eby, at least in my opinion, very much pre-judges the reasons why an individual may be before the courts
Three days ago (Dec 16th) in Williams lake, BC NDP Attorney
General David Eby issued a statement in support of the new
Indigenous court:
“Our government is committed to addressing
the over-representation of Indigenous peoples in the correctional system, which
has its roots in systemic discrimination and the impacts of inter-generational
trauma from residential schools.
“The Province is working with Indigenous
communities to establish Indigenous courts throughout British Columbia. These
courts offer alternative sentencing options that honour traditional cultural
practices, support rehabilitation and acknowledge the impact the person’s
actions have had on others.
Attorney General Eby then continued, “I’m
very pleased that Melissa Gillespie, provincial court chief judge, has
increased access to these more culturally appropriate approaches in Williams
Lake by approving the community’s proposal for an Indigenous court.
He then concluded, “It will support better
outcomes for people in conflict with the law and help reduce the
over-representation of Indigenous peoples in our jails. It also brings us one
step closer to reaching one of our most important goals as a government –
building a justice system that better respects and addresses the needs of
Indigenous peoples.”
Let me begin by saying that it is a sad state of
affairs when an individual, no matter their race, colour, sexual orientation, or
religious beliefs must be concerned about speaking out for what they believe may
be wrong.
I find myself in that very position now, however I am going to state what I believe regardless.
I find myself in that very position now, however I am going to state what I believe regardless.
While I believe the Indigenous court system provides positive results, I think the comments of Attorney General David Eby very much
pre-judges the reasons why an individual may be before the court system in the first place.
Furthermore,
I believe it is also prejudicial towards the expectations of the resulting outcomes
of a trial – whether in a regular or Indigenous peoples court.
Dozens
of people we walk past, and see every single day, live lives that are very much
developed by their family’s history, their upbringing, outside influences, if
they have been sexually or physically abused, by genetics, through the ravages
of drugs and / or alcohol, and by how they themselves have chosen to live.
Each on
has their own story – sometimes good – sometimes bad – and sometimes very ugly.
Some
may be scared by the impacts of war ... sustained sexual abuse ... the list
goes on.
How we chose to make our way through life however, is a decision we have to make
– and for some it is a painful, gut-wrenching, difficult thing to do.
Society
and government therefore, I believe, is obligated to provide every support
needed for those who have been victimized. That support must cover a wide range
of things from counseling, education, safe places to live, treatment centres
... and those are just the obvious ones.
The
costs will be high, but what is a human life worth, and how much value do we
place on it? What will be the
never-ending costs of doing nothing?
The
comments of David Eby should make us stop and consider if this is a road we
want to travel, or if instead we want to provide individuals with what they need
to become whole within.
To me,
that’s an outcome that we should be striving for.
So,
with that, I say to Attorney General David Eby, ‘Again, I have no doubt the Indigenous court system provides positive results ... that said ... no one segment of
society, before the court system, should be pre-judged as to the possible reasons for why they are before the court system ... it’s the wrong course of action’.
Well given the dysfunctions of the past I'm willing to give this experiment a chance; a lot will depend on the details of the individual cases.
ReplyDeleteAlso, sending a young First Nations person to jail for a first offence would likely produce only a more hardened criminal so diversion could be productive.
But diverting a repeat offender only because s/he is First Nations would be unwise, depending on the circumstances.
In short, I don't think this experiment is worth opposing.
Also, Eby has been doing a superb job as A-G and doesn't deserve any campaign against him.